Significant difference between 10 mL and 30/60 mL syringe size groups is clearly demonstrated. There is a notable trend of superiority between of the 30/60 … The GLM analysis to assess bolus time by bolus number detected an interaction between syringe size and bolus number (Figure 5). As a consequence, we are unable to report the main effect related to this outcome of interest.

The GLM analysis, with Greenhouse-Geisser correction, for HCP self-reported fatigue by bolus number Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical did differ significantly across bolus 1, 2, and 3 (F 120.19, p<0.0001). There was no significant interaction in this analysis (Figure 6). Syringe size did not have a statistically significant impact on fatigue scores (p=0.51). Figure 5 A Fluid infusion time by syringe size group. In the GLM analysis an interaction was found between syringe size group and bolus number that precluded comment on the Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical impact of bolus number on fluid infusion time. This outcome was intended to determine whether ... Figure 6 Mean fatigue score with 95% confidence interval by syringe

size group and bolus number. Increased fatigue scores correlated significantly Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical with bolus number in each syringe group by GLM analysis. This provides a subjective basis for our recommendation … The total amount of fluid received by the model as a result of resuscitation was not significantly different between syringe size groups (p=.177) (Table 4). There were no catheter dislodgement events and so this outcome was not analyzed. Excellent agreement was found between the two blinded

outcome assessors based on the total fluid administration time data extracted from the trial video recordings Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical (ICC=0.99997). Table 4 Total Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical mean cylinder volumes with 95% confidence intervals by syringe group LY411575 in vitro Discussion This trial demonstrates a significant impact of syringe size on fluid administration time in a study setting involving health care provider subjects and a non-clinical pediatric fluid resuscitation model. Our results suggest that the use until of larger syringe sizes (30 mL or 60 mL) is most efficient and dissuades the use of 10 mL syringes in situations where rapid pediatric fluid resuscitation is required. While the 20 mL syringe size was not statistically inferior to the 30 and 60 mL sizes, there was a trend towards inferiority and the 20 mL group results did not statistically differ from the 10 mL group. We had hypothesized that HCPs would objectively fatigue over the course of performing the intervention as borne out by differences in the administration times of boluses 1, 2, and 3. We were unable to confirm or refute this hypothesis due to the presence of an interaction that precluded assessment of the main effects in this analysis.